“Peter Pan” is Unmasked as Mike Parker

[Res Ipsa]

Of course they didn’t think using ‘digital blackface’ to take a dig at the Heartlanders’ perceived racism was abhorrent. They thought it was funny, and they let the lie, created by a white man, uncorrected by other white men, stand because it was useful to provide cover for Mike Parker, a white man. Obviously it’s not the end of the world, but it is what it is. How people want to react to that is their prerogative.

I think the bigger issue is the duplicity they muck around with regard to all the things they bitch about. The idea they created an anonymous blog with which to attack fellow Latter-days, viciously, is the real eyebrow raiser, in my opinion.

- Doc

I agree with your last point. It seems the General Authorities of their church do as well.

ETA: the term "digital blackface" was new to me, so I looked for an article. I don't think the term fits this situation. That's not a defense of the conduct -- it's a criticism of use of the term.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I agree with your last point. It seems the General Authorities of their church do as well.

ETA: the term "digital blackface" was new to me, so I looked for an article. I don't think the term fits this situation. That's not a defense of the conduct -- it's a criticism of use of the term.

I’m certainly open to a better term if you can think of one within context of Boylan’s choice to use a black man’s avatar to tease the Heartlanders (their description, not mine).

- Doc

[MormonDiscussionInc]

any idea where this face originated? is it the same as the original?

[Res Ipsa]

ETA: the term "digital blackface" was new to me, so I looked for an article. I don't think the term fits this situation. That's not a defense of the conduct -- it's a criticism of use of the term.

I’m certainly open to a better term if you can think of one within context of Boylan’s choice to use a black man’s avatar to tease the Heartlanders (their description, not mine).

- Doc

I'm fumbling around with how to think about the whole thing. I think the closest term I've heard yet is Marcus's use of "appropriation," but it doesn't fit well with the way I've understood appropriation. Boylan made one statement, then appears to have completely dropped the issue. Have we seen any attempt by him to perpetuate the existence of a black apologist? Parker didn't deny it, which he absolutely should have. But did he make any effort to portray himself as a black man? Boylan put him in an uncomfortable position, and he didn't take the opportunity he should have to set the record straight. (I mean, how "confusing" would it have been to simply say that Boylan was in error and that he is not the "Richard Nygren" that Boylan described?) But did he do anything to perpetuate the appearance of being a black man from the South? Did any of the LGT crowd go on to use Nygren to establish some kind of street cred for the LGT? That would be more like "appropriation" as I understand the term.

I dunno. Maybe it will be come known as a "Boylan."

[MormonDiscussionInc]

Also I am looking for the relationship connections that can indicate a deeply close working relationship between

Smoot and Peterson

Smoot and Parker

Parker and Boylan

I have sufficient for Parker to Kraus

and Boylan to Kraus

Though I welcome more.

asking for a friend

an image showing how close the 2 are or screen shot of text would be best. Imagine a "crime board" of sorts....

[Marcus]

Given canpakes is gunning for my Top Troll of the Universe (as awarded by Res Ipsa) spot, maybe it's time to flex my muscles a bit...

Asked...


And answered!

Hold up, there's more...


Goalposts moved!!!! Now, it's the specific use of the 'R' word required!

So, asked...
And Answered! Again!

Oh wait, a point of order...

And the answer:


Sure, sure..BUT, no response to the SECOND round of goalpost-moving asked and answered??! Bad form! Sigh, let's move on...


That's going to be a hard no. Claiming one meant it in a nice way doesn't excuse a race misappropriation.

On the other hand, this excuse argues an interesting variation on that:


It's official, Counsel, you are hired! I am looking forward to you, as my legal representation, explaining to the judge that my kid didn't consider going 90 mph on the Interstate late at night when no other cars were around to be bad behavior, therefore the 4 points and $250 fine should all be voided.

While you're at it, please explain in local court that my spouse wasn't aware of the law prohibiting parking within 20ft of the stop sign, he really, really really was positive it was 15ft! And he thought he was behaving well by parking at 15 ft! Therefore his fine will be dropped also, right?

(And my neighbor plays loud music very, very late at night, until the police stop by and ask them to follow the law and stop. Do NOT tell my neighbors they can get away with this by claiming that, in their not so humble opinion, it is NOT bad behavior to play really loud music that they really, really like, really, really, REALLY late at night, because claiming "it is not" would override any violation of the law. In fact, don't speak to anyone at all. You're MY secret weapon. )

Okay, end of troll practice. No hard feelings, right?

None at all. Although this is a sub-par effort on your part. Your best trolling is more subtle, more elegant. Maybe canpakes has reason to hope.

Eh, that's just sour grapes. Granted, I had less to work with--I mean seriously, 2 asked-and-answereds, AND a goalpost moving? the appeal to ignorance at the end was just a cherry on the top. Although the offer stands for New Jersey traffic court representation--now that's a true racket.

[malkie]

any idea where this face originated? is it the same as the original?

https://disqus.com/by/Richard_Nygren/

Who’s behind this Disqus account?

https://www.futhead.com/players/209554/

[MormonDiscussionInc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39Om9Fnt7u0

this one was interesting Smoot with Dan Peterson when he was a young man.

[Res Ipsa]

None at all. Although this is a sub-par effort on your part. Your best trolling is more subtle, more elegant. Maybe canpakes has reason to hope.

Eh, that's just sour grapes. Granted, I had less to work with--I mean seriously, 2 asked-and-answereds, AND a goalpost moving? the appeal to ignorance at the end was just a cherry on the top. Although the offer stands for New Jersey traffic court representation--now that's a true racket.

It would only be "sour grapes" if I had ever claimed to exceed your level of skill at trolling. I don't consider myself skilled in that particular art form.

by the way, "asked and answered" doesn't mean what you think it means. That did cost you points.

[Marcus]

ETA: the term "digital blackface" was new to me, so I looked for an article. I don't think the term fits this situation. That's not a defense of the conduct -- it's a criticism of use of the term.

I’m certainly open to a better term if you can think of one within context of Boylan’s choice to use a black man’s avatar to tease the Heartlanders (their description, not mine).

- Doc

That brings up the point that for me defines the 'misappropriation' to use that as a temporary place marker. Look at Parker's explanation:

At the time of the interview, Robert Boylan knew my real identity. I asked him about the “Richard Nygren” comment, and he told me that he made it up as “a little joke to tweak Heartlanders” because of some racist remarks that had published on the FIRM Foundation’s website. “Richard Nygren” is a fictional character.

So... Boylan was hoping to "tweak Heartlanders" as payback for what he considered to be "racist remarks."

The underlined word 'racist' hyperlinks to this:

Are Lamanites at our Southern Border?
By Rian Nelson -March 22, 2021
https://bookofmormonevidence.org/are-la ... rn-border/

And the underlined word 'remarks' links here, to section 9 of this link:

A Heartlanders Response to the Salt Lake Tribune
By Rian Nelson -April 2, 20221032
https://bookofmormonevidence.org/a-hear ... in_context

And this is Section 9:

My entire quote in context
“Question from a Customer!

Does the border immigration crisis have possible connections to the gathering of the Lamanites so they can participate in the construction of the NEW JERUSALEM?

Prepaid Preacher?
An LDS man on you tube called the prepaid preacher, quoted these following scriptures, claiming that maybe these illegal immigrants crossing the southern border today into our country are the house of Jacob as lions (Illegal Immigrants) going into the midst of sheep (Current Americans)
...Rod Meldrum March 22, 2021

The first link starts the same way:

Question from a Customer!
Does the border immigration crisis have possible connections to the gathering of the Lamanites so they can participate in the construction of the NEW JERUSALEM?

Prepaid Preacher?
An LDS man on you tube called the prepaid preacher, quoted these following scriptures, claiming that maybe these illegal immigrants crossing the southern border today into our country are the house of Jacob as lions (Illegal Immigrants) going into the midst of sheep (Current Americans)...

These are lengthy links, so does anyone have any insight into how pretending Peter Pan is an "one of only [a] few African-American apologists in the Church at the moment [who] lives in Birmingham, Alabama” constitutes a joke that tweaks Heartlanders, in response to these posts?

It doesn't seem credible.

Then there is Parker's further explanation, this time of his own behavior:

...On July 19, 2022, I posted a link to the Boylan/Kraus interview. At that time, my real identity was not known publicly, so any attempt on my part to address Boylan’s “Richard Nygren” comment would have been untrue (if I confirmed it) or confusing (if I denied it). Instead, I simply wrote that the interview “goes into more detail about this blog than I’m comfortable with.”

I already posted that, literally just days before, Parker had posted he was not the apologist Peterson, nor was he the apologist Smoot, and for good measure he openly stated he wasn't the apologist Krauss. This post had links to at least three other entries with open admissions regarding who he was NOT.

So, why would it now be confusing to deny he was Nygren? What is different? in my opinion, this is an after the fact attempt to justify actions he knows were inappropriate.